Re: Domains, types, and application engineering ....

"DBMS_Plumber" <paul_geoffrey_brown_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1168368757.898108.24190_at_k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Adding a note (and yes, I am still puzzling about the definition of
> Plus, so relax!) ...
>
> To drag this whole discussion out into the machine shop, pin it down
> with a set of vice clamps, and go at it hard with the drill press and
> arc-welding gear, the POINT of a relational DBMS is to accurately model
> some real world problem domain.
>
> So what "ought" the behavior of the domains in your relation schema be?
> Precisely the interesting behavior of the real world phenomenon we're
> modeling. Not something some standard dreamed up (though that's
> probably going to be useful in a lot of cases, and re-use will
> doubtless improve your the quality of your information system and the
> productivity of your engineers).
>
> If your application calls for you to organize instances of a concept
> like '10 mandarins', then you need first, to document and nail down how
> these things behave, and then second, implement software to encapsulate
> (*gasp*) that behavior.

Are you encapsulating data or behaviour? Or is the question moot?

>
> The function of the DBMS is to take this implementation and to present
> you with a body of relational machinery that can be used to organize
> and reason about instances of this domain, according to the behavior
> you've defined for it.
>
Received on Wed Jan 10 2007 - 15:19:02 CET